Embrace Your Defamations, as affording you precious opportunities to exemplify a patience that shall glorify God; and imitate the exemplary patience of your admirable Savior.

Usually defamations are little more than provocations. Nothing so unusually easily and provokes Men to intemperate passion as to be reproached. The old pagans and Stoics that could bear everything else found reproach to be insupportable. This would make them roar as load as waves on the Aegean shore.[1]

He was a great and a strong man and a scholar, yea, a master of better philosophy who yet complained, Reproach has broken my heart. For patience to get the upper hand of passion on this occasion, and moderate it, and regulate it, verily this is a more perfect work of Christianity.[2]

Sir, if you may be so happy as to attain unto it, you may, instead of being troubled say, I am happy that I ever had the occasion! Upon the first advice of any abuse offered to you, resolve, I will take heed to my ways that I sin not with my tongue; I will keep my mouth with a bridle, while I have before me what the unbridled mouth of wickedness has uttered of me .[3]

But make your application to the God of all grace,[4] for the grace to keep this resolution. If you resist the first impression, the first resentments, which you may too readily feel upon vile reproaches, you have gained a great point; you have steered clear of abundance of sin; you will be more able afterwards to carry on a strain of lovely patience, and merit the judge’s motto, prudens qui patiens: a prudent man is a patient man.

Let me beseech you, after this, to maintain most exact watch, a most severe guard upon yourself, lest while the waters of strife are broaching, your provoked spirit may at any time speak unadvisedly with your lips. The meekest man in the world[5], you know, did so.[6]

My friend, your calumnious adversaries furnish you with valuable opportunities to adorn the doctrine of God your Savior[7] and do such things as are done by none but those that may lay hold on the comforts of eternal life. The blessed Eliot’s three words, bear, forbear, forgive: Now, now is the time for them to come into exercise.

All tendencies to revenge upon your enemies the wrongs which they have done you must now be abhored, be suppressed; must be looked upon as worse things than the worst of your enemies’ [bad acts]. ’Tis probable they may be such people as may deserve to have much evil spoken of them. However, ’tis now decenet for you to be more sparing in speaking of it than you would have been if you had suffered nothing from them. Leave that just work to others; there is hazard lest you overdo, or least some revengeful glance of your own do work in it, if you go meddle with it.

On the other side, if you know any good of those that have spoken ill of you, be you not adverse to speak that good and not ill-pleased if you hear it spoken by others.

How famous, how precious is the name of Calvin for the answer which he gave when he was told that angry Luther put some hard names upon him. An answer so recited, so esteemed by all the world that there is no need now of my telling any of my neighbors what it is.[8]

But be sure that your heart stand always in awe of that word: Proverbs 20.22, “Say not thou, I will recompense evil.” And Romans 12.17, “Recompense to no man evil for evil.”

Athenagoras, I remember, gives this description of the primitive Christians, “’Tis counted an indifferent thing for a man to revile another, by whom he has been first reviled. But we Christians do speak as well as ever we can of them that speak nothing but evil of us.”[9]

And Justin Martyr bears just witness for them, “We don’t ask that they who haveh most accused us, and abused us, and falsely spoken evil of us may be punished for it; no ’tis punishment enough to be left unto such folly and rashness.”[10]

Oh! Do not look upon this generous patience as impracticable or a lesion only for the Elohim whose dwelling is with flesh![11] Rather, look upon it as an unmanly weakness to be unable to bear the ill words of other men. It is a pretty remark when Abishai could not bear the railing tongue of Shimei.[12] Says David unto him, What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah? Now, Zeruiah was their mother. Why, the sons of Zeruiah? He seems to intimate you have more of your mother than of your father in you. You talk as if you were of the weaker sex. If you had the souls of men in you, a few ill words would not be such an intolerable grievance to you.

If you will harken to me, you shall take little notice of the affronts that are offered you: For the most part they are not worth your notice.

When the famous Doctor Sands was ignominiously carried on a lame jade through the city of London, a base woman in scorn threw a stone at him and hit him full on the breast. He took no other notice of it, but only made this mild answer, “Woman, I pray God forgive thee.” This was notice enough.

[1] Aegean: Greek. The reference is to the Iliad, Book 1, line 34 where the priest Chryses sits by the roaring sea.

2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; 3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. 4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

10 And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? 11 And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. 12 And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them. 13 This is the water of Meribah; because the children of Israel strove with the LORD, and he was sanctified in them.

[7] Titus 2:10 (AV) Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

[8] In a 1544 letter from John Calvin to Heinrich Bullinger, he wrote, “Often have I been wont to declare, that even though [Martin Luther] were to call me a devil, I should still not the less esteem and acknowledge him as an illustrious servant of God.”

Allow me here to lift up my voice boldly in loud and audible out-cry, pleading as I do before philosophic princes. For who of those that reduce syllogisms, and clear up ambiguities, and explain etymologies,or of those who teach homonyms and synonyms, and predicaments and axioms, and what is the subject and what the predicate, and who promise their disciples by these and such like instructions to make them happy: who of them have so purged their souls as, instead of hating their enemies, to love them; and, instead of speaking ill of those who have reviled them (to abstain from which is of itself an evidence of no mean forbearance), to bless them; and to pray for those who plot against their lives? On the contrary, they never cease with evil intent to search out skilfully the secrets of their art,and are ever bent on working some ill, making the art of words and not the exhibition of deeds their business and profession. But among us you will find uneducated persons, and artisans, and old women, who, if they are unable in words to prove the benefit of our doctrine, yet by their deeds exhibit the benefit arising from their persuasion of its truth: they do not rehearse speeches, but exhibit good works; when struck, they do not strike again; when robbed, they do not go to law; they give to those that ask of them, and love their neighbours as themselves.

For all are called Christians. Wherefore we demand that the deeds of all those who are accused to you be judged, in order that each one who is convicted may be punished as an evil-doer, and not as a Christian; and if it is clear that any one is blameless, that he may be acquitted, since by the mere fact of his being a Christian he does no wrong. For we will not require that you punish our accusers; they being sufficiently punished by their present wickedness and ignorance of what is right

I suspect we do a poor job distinguishing between the two types of ambition or recognizing the perversity of eritheia. Selfish ambition, at least to a certain degree, is not only an acceptable sin in our culture but a seemingly necessary one to succeed in the world. It may also be incentivized in a church culture caving into the temptation to elevate the public image of success above qualities like quiet and steady faithfulness in relative obscurity, a work-ethic rooted in giving and helping rather than getting and keeping, and a willingness to go without and sacrifice for the good of others.

We cannot esteem worldly success without neglecting godliness and overlooking spiritual maturity. Worldly success is not a bad thing, but it is not to be confused with being above reproach or enjoying a good reputation and it may indicate little more than selfish ambition–the disease of greatness. In ministers and congregations it may even dress itself in claims of kingdom growth, public witness, administrative acumen, evangelistic fruitfulness, entrepreneurial spirit, and so on. These are all highly desirable objects, but sin can twist each one into a pious-sounding cover for eritheia.

I suspect this is the primary root of most church conflict: There is selfish ambition which dresses itself up as something good and spiritual. Read the whole thing

The following question comes from a long article in the Journal of Pastoral Theology (3.3, 1979) by Harvie Conn. Conn discusses how a church has a “model” for ministry; an often unarticulated self-understanding of what a church is, does, and how it functions. A great of the discussion is how to make change (do more evangelism for instance) when the inherited culture stands against that change.

In the diagnostic section, Conn quotes this question (cited to Dr. Ward at Michigan State):

Pride and status. Has leadership become something of an end in itself? Have the teachings of Christ about servanthood become culturally clouded by the Horatio Alger syndrome: one begins low in order to become great? How real is the danger in ministry that servanthood becomes a temporary or transient period of initiation or demonstration of eligibility? Is leadership defined too often not by service but by privileges?

This question struck me, because it points to a poison I have seen destroy too many churches and harm too many Christians. It is a poison from the broader world and culture. Because it is so common in our world it can become nearly invisible in our church.

This is the (draft) introduction to first chapter of a short book on Church Conflict. The goal of this book will be to train a congregation to avoid conflict. And, while nothing can perfectly protect against sin, there is a great deal which can be done to encourage a congregation in patterns of behavior and thought which can make conflict more difficult to maintain and easier to resolve.

We will go very wrong in thinking about conflict in the church, if we think that conflict is necessarily and always evil: even though the conflict we experience is almost always evil.

Conflict springs from a desire for what is good: It begins with the love of some-thing, and then the desire for the protection and promotion of that-object. Since we are fighting for what we love, we are fighting for justice. When we rightly love what is true and beautiful, our defense of that thing, that person, that right is just. Conflict springs from the apparent love of justice.

But sin has perverted our loves and has perverted our sense of justice. Sin has taken something good (the desire to protect the good, true and beautiful) and turns it into evil. Conflict is powerful and destructive because it is the misuse of something good and necessary.

Conflict also covers itself with the language of virtue: If you are fighting for what is right, you are fighting for virtue. When conflict comes within the Church, it uses spiritual language: conflict takes on sin, love, God, et cetera. Therefore, our opponent in church conflict can easily be portrayed as the enemy of God!

The church at Corinth fell into terrible fights among factions, with each party claiming to be most godly:

11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 1 Corinthians 1:11–13 (ESV)

When love of justice and the language of God’s side come together it not surprising that conflict can take deep root in a congregation.

An Example of Righteous Conflict

King Saul’s story in Scripture is marked with conflict. His first official act as King was an instance of righteous conflict, instigated by the Spirit of God. First, there was a problem, a foreign King, Nahash the Ammonite threatened the city of Jabesh-gilead with slavery and the lose of each citizens’ right eye:

5 Now, behold, Saul was coming from the field behind the oxen. And Saul said, “What is wrong with the people, that they are weeping?” So they told him the news of the men of Jabesh. 6 And the Spirit of God rushed upon Saul when he heard these words, and his anger was greatly kindled. 7 He took a yoke of oxen and cut them in pieces and sent them throughout all the territory of Israel by the hand of the messengers, saying, “Whoever does not come out after Saul and Samuel, so shall it be done to his oxen!” Then the dread of the Lord fell upon the people, and they came out as one man. 1 Samuel 11:5–7 (ESV)

Here there conflict – there is open war. But the conflict is wholly just on the side of Saul. Our text tells us that Saul’s anger, aroused by his sense of justice, was stirred by “the Spirit of God”.

This instance teaches that conflict is not necessary evil – at least that it is not necessarily the case that both parties involved in a conflict are wrong. Here, Saul was wholly just in his anger and the conflict against the Ammonites was a righteous act.

How Sin Hijacks our Sense of Justice

But not all conflict is righteous. The conflict which troubles us is unjust conflict, particularly the conflict where both parties are in sin. As explained above, conflict springs from a sense of offended justice. Where sin hijacks our sense of justice and leads us to seek to protect that which is evil, our participation in conflict is itself sin.

This is the first step in sinful conflict: our sense of justice, of right and wrong is altered. Do do this, sin hijacks our desire and our language. We see both perversions in the life of Saul.

In 1 Samuel 15, God commands Saul to destroy the perpetual enemy of Israel, the Amalekites. Saul brings the battle, but he does not utterly them. He spares “best” from destruction:

9 But Saul and the people spared Agag and the best of the sheep and of the oxen and of the fattened calves and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them. All that was despised and worthless they devoted to destruction. 1 Samuel 15:9 (ESV)

Those things which Saul (and the people) desired as “best” – the objects of his lust – these were kept alive in direct disobedience to God. Saul desired something more than the glory of God. Perversion of desire is the first step in sinful conflict.

Saul then takes the next step, perversion in language: rationalizes his sin (which makes Samuel out to be the one who is contrary to God):

13 And Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, “Blessed be you to the Lord. I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” 14 And Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears and the lowing of the oxen that I hear?” 15 Saul said, “They have brought them from the Amalekites, for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen to sacrifice to the Lord your God, and the rest we have devoted to destruction.”

1 Samuel 15:13–15 (ESV)

Saul uses spiritual language, the language of justice and virtue to dress up his sin. And, if Saul’s opponent had not been a prophet of God, Saul (who made a decent argument and who argued from a position of power) would have won. At the very least, Saul would have been able to prosecute the conflict for quite a while (as Saul did in the case of David).

Below, we will examine the details of how conflict perverts love and justice to sinful ends.

Pride is the greatest master of misrule in the world; it is the great incendiary in the soul of man, in families, in towns, in cities, in all societies, in church and state: this wind causeth tempests to arise. Prov. 13:10: “Only by pride cometh contention.” The Holy Ghost singles out pride, as the only cause of all contentions, because it is the chief; though there be many in a riot, the whole is usually laid upon the ringleaders. Pride is the ringleader to all riots, divisions, disturbances among us. Prov. 21:24: “Proud and haughty scorner is his name, who dealeth in proud wrath.” Pride may be well indicated for the great common barrator, or wrangler, in all our towns and cities; it makes woful troubles wherever it comes.

(The first draft of an introduction to series of lessons on how to create a peace. Church conflict is painfully and extraordinarily common.

We will go very wrong in thinking about conflict in the church, if we think that conflict is necessarily and always evil: even though the conflict we experience is almost always evil. Conflict springs from a desire for what is good, but sin perverts the longing for good and turns it to evil. That is why conflict is so strong — and especially why conflict can take such deep root in a congregation.

Conflict Seeks Justice

Conflict comes about because something is wrong and it must be fixed.

Imagine you see a man quietly steal another man’s wallet. There is no conflict: the victim doesn’t know his pocket has been picked. But you know the theft has occurred. You shout, “Thief!” At that moment you and the victim chase the thief. As soon as you acknowledge the evil, a conflict takes place.

Something wrong has taken place: your sense of justice has been offended. You immediately seek to change things. Yet, there is another person who does not agree with your change. Therefore, a conflict ensues.

The conflict may be unpleasant and undesirable, but the conflict is not evil when it seeks to change an evil state for a better state.

Conflict arises because one person seeks justice: there is something wrong and someone works to fix it even though others will not cooperate and may even fight back.

God Brings Conflict

While God is a God of peace, that is not all the story. Exodus 15:3 tells us that, “The LORD is a man of war.” The Egyptians had enslaved and oppressed the Israelites. God brought war against Pharaoh for Pharaoh’s wickedness. There was conflict, but the conflict was motivated by justice and obtained justice.

Jesus was the Prince of Peace. But Jesus says, “Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division.” (Luke 12:51.) Jesus’ death upon the cross was an act of war (Col. 2:15; 1 Peter 3:22). The Christian life is a life of war (Eph. 6:10-17). God working in the world is an act of war, and that is not a metaphor.

The Engine of Conflict

At its heart, conflict springs from a sense that something has gone wrong and I must fix it. A desire for justice, for making things right, for fixing what is wrong drives conflict.

As long as my sense of justice continues and strength does not wear out, I will continue to prosecute the conflict.

If we do not understand that at its heart, conflict springs from a sense of justice, we will never understand how to respond to conflict.

Everyone in a Conflict Thinks Themselves Justified

Everyone in the war at some level justified their actions to themselves (even if it was a personal fear of punishment for not fighting in the war).

The same thing happens in personal conflicts: the people on both sides of the conflict are certain they are right. Imagine two men, one is peaceful and minding his own business. Another man attacks him physically or verbally. The peaceful has now been hurt. His sense of justice has been offended and he responds: he is right to respond, because a man has done him evil.

Sometimes our sense of need can justify our conflict. A poor man is starving. He sees a richer man with food. The poor man attacks the rich man to steal the food. The poor man may not think it is wrong for the rich man to have food, but the poor thinks it is wrong that he does not have anything to eat. Justice demands that I eat, that I not die, thinks the poor man.

My Sense of Justice is Broken

It is completely true that conflict takes place because I think something is wrong. The trouble is that my sense of right and wrong, my sense of justice, is broken. I willingly fight for the wrong things.

I’m an American, and I grew up knowing that the United States defeating the Nazis was an unqualified good thing. The Nazis were completely wrong and we were completely right. The problem is, someone on the other side of the war was certain they were right.

The Germans and the Japanese in World War II were the exact same kind of human beings as the Americans (in fact, plenty of Americans fighting in the war were descendants of Germans and Japanese people). The people fighting against the Allies were as certain they were right as the Allies were certain.

At least one side of the conflict takes place because someone’s sense of justice is broken. If everyone had precisely the same sense of right and wrong, there would never be conflict between human beings. But we don’t have the same sense of right and wrong in every circumstance. Therefore, either there is no absolute right; or, something has caused our sense of justice to be broken.

Romans 1 explains that human beings have refused to acknowledge God and be thankful to God, therefore, human beings have become “futile in their thinking and their foolish hearts were darkened” (Rom.1:21). Human beings “exchanged the truth about God for a lie” (Rom. 1:25). Human beings have been turned over to debased desires. “And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.” (Romans 1:28) This sorry state is called the “noetic effect of sin” – that means sin has twisted-up our mind, our desires: We cannot think straight and we do not want the right things.

Our sense of justice, or right and wrong is out of whack. But our desire for justice, our desire for things to be right has not gone away. We know the world is wrong, and we desire it to be different, but we can’t fix it.

Imagine a carload of drunks whose car breaks down in the desert. They know their situation is completely wrong. They know they have to get out of the desert or they will die. But due to drunkenness and ignorance, they can’t fix the car and can’t formulate a good plan to save themselves.

Human beings have precisely that problem. Sin has made us ignorant, foolish and perverse.

Sinful Conflict is Conflict Without Justice

We know that God brings just conflict against sin.

We know that sometimes conflict is good and right when conflict is used to bring about justice. God was just to bring war against the Egyptians. David was right to kill Goliath.

But we also know that most conflict does not flow perfectly from God’s justice.

Even right knowledge about God’s justice is not sufficient to cause of to desire the right. Cain killed Able immediately after God told Cain how to be right. In fact, it was knowing God’s just demand which provoked Cain (Gen. 4:7-8). Saul hated David because God was with David (1 Sam. 18:11).

Sinful conflict comes about when a desire for something other than God’s perfect will drives our actions:

What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? 2 You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. 4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.

But here is the dangerous part: Remember when I said that conflict comes about because of our sense of justice has been offended? Our sense of justice perverted by sin merges with our selfish desires and we mistake our selfish desire for justice. Since we experience our selfish desire as a just and right desire, we war and we know that we are in the right to fight for our desires.

Conflict is so powerful and dangerous because the injustice of our actions is hidden from us. Sin uses an illusion which causes us to think that our selfish desires are just desires. James calls this sort of “wisdom” “demonic”:

14 But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.

James 3:14–16.

Our Brokenness Persists Even After Salvation

If the broken sense of justice comes about because of sin, then shouldn’t the church of God’s elect be freed from sinful conflict? Sadly no. Even after we are regenerate, we are imperfect. Our life after salvation is a life of sanctification, of gradual conformity to Christ. But perfect peace among the people of God belongs to glorification, which is to come.

Paul’s letters to Corinth (two letters), Rome, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon deal with church conflict, at least in part. 1 Peter, 1 John and 3 John, as well as Jude and Revelation also imply or directly address conflict in the church.

This is where the danger becomes acute: After we have become reconciled to God and know the truth, we can become even more certain that we are right about everything. When sin attaches itself to our heightened sense of being right and justice, the potential for conflict is even greater. Christians who have been deceived by their own sin masquerading as justice and truth can be greatest devils on the earth.

Our Conflict Ought not Be:

Now comes the sobering part. Jesus goes on in 17:21 to say something that always causes me to cringe. If as Christians we do not cringe, it seems to me we are not very sensitive or very honest, because Jesus here gives us the final apologetic. What is the final apologetic? “That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” This is the final apologetic.

In John 13 the point was that if an individual Christian does not show love toward other true Christians, the world has a right to judge that he is not a Christian. Here Jesus is stating something else which is much more cutting, much more profound: we cannot expect the world to believe that the Father sent the Son, that Jesus’ claims are true, and that Christianity is true, unless the world sees some reality of the oneness of true Christians.

Now that is frightening. Should we not feel some emotion at this point?

Look at it again. Jesus is not saying that Christians should judge each other (as to their being Christian or not) on this basis. Please notice this with tremendous care. The church is to judge whether a man is a Christian on the basis of his doctrine, the propositional content of his faith, and then his credible profession of faith. When a man comes before a local church that is doing its job, he will be quizzed on the content of what he believes. If, for example, a church is conducting a heresy trial (the New Testament indicates there are to be trials in the church of Christ), the question of heresy will turn on the content of the man’s doctrine. The church has a right to judge—in fact it is commanded to judge—a man on the content of what he believes and teaches.

But we cannot expect the world to judge that way, because the world cares nothing about doctrine. That is especially true in the second half of the twentieth century when, on the basis of their epistemology, men no longer believe even in the possibility of absolute truth. And if we are surrounded by a world which no longer believes in the concept of truth, certainly we cannot expect people to have any interest in whether a man’s doctrine is correct or not.

But Jesus did give the mark that will arrest the attention of the world, even the attention of the modern man who says he is just a machine. Because every man is made in the image of God and has therefore aspirations for love, there is something that can be in every geographical climate—in every point of time—which cannot fail to arrest his attention.

What is it? The love that true Christians show for each other and not just for their own party.

Look back at that list of New Testament references to conflict in the Church. That tells us two things: We know to be prepared for sinful conflict.

Now here is the hopeful part, we also know that God expects us to do something about conflict. We have a mountain of instruction and help available to us which was not available to these earliest Christians.

When conflict first broke out in Corinth, the Corinthians did not have 1 Corinthians from Paul. But we have the letters of Paul, Peter, John, Jude, Jesus – we have the entire canon of Scripture for our help. We have the gift of the Spirit. We have what we need “for life and godliness” – if we would only make the effort to use it.